colonel@ellie.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman) (02/26/86)
> On point B:, studies have shown that the number of errors or changes is > exponentially related to the number of lines of code. One study indicates > that the average is one error per 1000 lines. You don't mean "exponentially," do you? (Though it applies to _some_ programmers I know....) -- Col. G. L. Sicherman UU: ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel CS: colonel@buffalo-cs BI: csdsicher@sunyabva
jdz@wucec2.UUCP (03/04/86)
In article <832@ellie.UUCP> colonel@ellie.UUCP writes: >> On point B:, studies have shown that the number of errors or changes is >> exponentially related to the number of lines of code. One study indicates >> that the average is one error per 1000 lines. >You don't mean "exponentially," do you? (Though it applies to _some_ >programmers I know....) Uh, yes, He did mean exponentially. Really. I don't recall the exact study which made this claim, but I do recall that it was exponential in some constant fraction of the number of lines. The expression was reasonable for up to about 200 lines, then quickly exploded. This is just a memory, though, so please don't yell at me. If you do run across the paper or real numbers, please feel free to post them. -- Jason D. Zions ...!{seismo,cbosgd,ihnp4}!wucs!wucec2!jdz Box 1045 Washington University St. Louis MO 63130 USA (314) 889-6160 Nope, I didn't say nothing. Just random noise.
colonel@ellie.UUCP (03/06/86)
In article <832@ellie.UUCP>, colonel@ellie.UUCP (Col. G. L. Sicherman) writes: > > On point B:, studies have shown that the number of errors or changes is > > exponentially related to the number of lines of code. One study indicates > > that the average is one error per 1000 lines. > > You don't mean "exponentially," do you? (Though it applies to _some_ > programmers I know....) > -- Col. G. L. Sicherman What do you know about it? Considering the amount of implosive inter- connectedness of a large program, the bug rate probably _is_ exponential. -- Col. G. L. Sicherman UU: ...{rocksvax|decvax}!sunybcs!colonel CS: colonel@buffalo-cs BI: csdsicher@sunyabva
steven@boring.uucp (Steven Pemberton) (03/12/86)
In article <1437@wucec2.UUCP> jdz@wucec2.UUCP (Jason D. Zions) writes: > >> On point B:, studies have shown that the number of errors or changes is > >> exponentially related to the number of lines of code. One study indicates > >> that the average is one error per 1000 lines. > >You don't mean "exponentially," do you? (Though it applies to _some_ > >programmers I know....) > > Uh, yes, He did mean exponentially. Really. I don't recall the exact study which > made this claim, but I do recall that it was exponential in some constant > fraction of the number of lines. You can find some details in 'The Mythical Man Month' by FP Brookes, Addison Wesley, 1975. He quotes several large scale projects, and says that the exponent is 1.5 of the number of lines of code, regardless of language. It's a great book, and worth reading for his advice on running large-scale software projects. Steven Pemberton, CWi, Amsterdam.
kludge@gitpyr.UUCP (03/15/86)
In article <6824@boring.UUCP> steven@mcvax.UUCP (Steven Pemberton) writes: >You can find some details in 'The Mythical Man Month' by FP Brookes, Addison >Wesley, 1975. He quotes several large scale projects, and says that the >exponent is 1.5 of the number of lines of code, regardless of language. It's >a great book, and worth reading for his advice on running large-scale >software projects. Assuming that this is true, then the more dense a language is, the fewer the number of lines needed, and the fewer the bugs. Comparing C and assembly this seems true, but the number of bugs in an APL program compared with the number of lines makes me think that this doesn't always hold true. It sounds like a nice generalization, but it does not take into account many things about language density. ------- Disclaimer: Everything I say is probably a trademark of someone. But don't worry, I probably don't know what I'm talking about. Scott Dorsey Kaptain_kludge ICS Programming Lab (Where old terminals go to die), Rich 110, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332 ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!kludge USnail: Box 36681, Atlanta GA. 30332 -- ------- Disclaimer: Everything I say is probably a trademark of someone. But don't worry, I probably don't know what I'm talking about. Scott Dorsey Kaptain_kludge ICS Programming Lab (Where old terminals go to die), Rich 110, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332 ...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!kludge USnail: Box 36681, Atlanta GA. 30332